The Homegrown Minneapolis Urban Ag Policy Plan was passed by the Minneapolis City Council!

The plan is rooted in a two+ year process with extensive community input and close collaboration with the Minneapolis Departments of Health and Community Planning and Economic Development and the Homegrown Minneapolis initiative.

As Minneapolis Mayor R. T. Rybak put it, “This plan represents hundreds of hours of work of volunteers and City staff, and it’s paid off.  The plan makes it easier to be part of the local, healthy, sustainable food movement and is a giant step toward helping our city and state move closer to food independence.”

Efforts here in Minneapolis were informed and inspired by the many communities around the country who blazed the trail on urban ag.  Thanks for sharing your sage advice and helping us make this a reality here in the Heartland!

You can see the plan itself at:  http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/dhfs/homegrown-home.asp

It’s been a busy week in Washington for agriculture (among other things). To catch you up on the latest news and policy, here is the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition’s policy roundup.

FARMERS IN D.C.

Ohio Beginning Farmer Testifies at House Ag Credit Hearing: On Thursday, April 14, the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, and Credit held a hearing to review credit conditions in rural America.  The two panels primarily featured witnesses from different credit providers, from independent banks to federal loan providers. Among the witnesses was Matt Starline, a young farmer and owner of Starline Organics in Athens, Ohio and a member of Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association, an NSAC member group.     Read more…

Guest Blog: Value-Added Producer Grants in Action: We have delayed publishing an update on the fiscal year 2011 appropriations and fiscal year 2012 budget bills several times in the past week due to a lack of detailed information emanating from Capitol Hill.  Now, with the government shutdown averted just after midnight last night, we understand (from the many emails received!) that readers would like to know what happened on sustainable agriculture priorities.  Unfortunately there is not yet much to report with any degree of assurance.  Read more…

CONGRESSIONAL NEWS

Congress Passes FY 2011 Budget, Cuts Billions From Agriculture: On Thursday, April 14, Congress passed a final 6-month continuing resolution (CR) that will fund the government through the end of the fiscal year.  The CR cuts $42 billion relative to FY 2010 levels for non-defense spending, but couples that with a $4 billion increase in defense spending, for a net decrease of approximately $38 billion.  Of that $38 billion, $12 billion was already enacted via three preceding short-term continuing resolutions over the past five weeks, including a $2 billion cut enacted as late as April 8 in the form of a one-week CR.  Read more…

Congress Releases Draft 6-Month Continuing Resolution: On Wednesday, April 8, the Senate rejected four legislative riders that would have limited EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.  The riders were offered for attachment to a small business bill. The amendment offered by Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and James Inhofe (R-OK) came closest to passing by a vote of 50-50 but did not receive the 60 votes required for passage of an amendment to the bill  . The amendment would have prohibited EPA from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas (GHG) to address climate change.    Read more…

What We Know and Don’t Know on the Budget: We have delayed publishing an update on the fiscal year 2011 appropriations and fiscal year 2012 budget bills several times in the past week due to a lack of detailed information emanating from Capitol Hill.  Now, with the government shutdown averted just after midnight last night, we understand (from the many emails received!) that readers would like to know what happened on sustainable agriculture priorities.  Unfortunately there is not yet much to report with any degree of assurance.  Read more… Read more »

The following courses are being taught online this summer through the University of Massachusetts:

PLSOILIN 185 – Sustainable Living (4 credits -  online only) GenEd (I);  introduces you to diverse global perspectives and practical personal solutions related to environmental, economic and social sustainability. Taught by Katie Campbell-Nelson and John Gerber.  Click here for more information.

PLSOILIN 290C – Land Use Policies and Agriculture in the U.S. (3 credits -  online only); provides students with an opportunity to explore the political, economic and societal forces that influence land use decisions, an understanding of the history of land use policies and planning in the U.S. as they relate to agriculture. Taught by Robert Wagner, Senior Policy Analyst for American Farmland Trust. Click here for more information.

PLSOILIN 397C – Community Food Systems (3 credits – mostly online, with one Saturday field trip); examines the movement of food from seed to table. Participants in the course explore local and global food systems, and specific food related issues that impact health of communities.  Taught by Catherine Sands, Director of Fertile Ground. Click here for more information.

Thanks to Betsy Rakola; Grants Management Specialist, USDA-AMS National Organic Program for putting together this information for us.

The USDA National Organic Program (NOP) administers a cost-share program to help certified organic farmers, ranchers, processors, and handlers pay for the cost of certification. If you have a current USDA organic certification, then you may be reimbursed for up to 75% of your costs for certification, such as inspection fees, application fees, and gross sales assessments/user fees. The annual maximum is $750 per certification. This is a great opportunity for organic operators to offset the cost of certification.

This program is not competitive, and money is available in all participating states. Applications are processed on a first-come, first-served basis until the money runs out. During the last two years, less than half of all certified producers and handlers applied to participate. If your operation is certified as USDA organic, then you may take advantage of this easy way to reduce your certification expenses.

How To Apply

1.      Contact your state’s Department of Agriculture (or its equivalent) for an application.

Contact names for each state are available online at www.ams.usda.gov/NOPCostShareProgramParticipants. Some states have application forms available for download, and these links are also available on the USDA website. If you don’t have access to the internet, then you can either call your certifier or your state Department of Agriculture to get an application. Note: At the time of writing, all states except Utah offered a cost share program.

2. Assemble your supporting documentation. You will need to show proof of your certification and the expenses you have already paid. Save your invoices, statements, and receipts – they may be required as proof of payment. The following documents are typically requested by State departments of agriculture, but make sure to review your state’s requirements carefully – it is your responsibility to ensure that your application is complete.

• Proof of USDA organic certification (a copy of your certificate)
• Itemized invoice showing expenses paid for certification
• W-9 tax form

Most certification-related expenses are eligible for reimbursement. However, keep in mind that items such as late fees, inspections due to noncompliance, and inspections for certifications other than USDA Organic (such as JAS or Bird Friendly) are not eligible for reimbursement under this program. You may receive one reimbursement per year for a new certification or a renewal of certification, provided that the annual maximum reimbursement does not exceed $750 per certificate.

Still have questions? Contact Betsy Rakola, the USDA National Organic Program’s cost share manager at 202-720-3252 or Betsy.Rakola@ams.usda.gov. Or, visit the cost share webpage at www.ams.usda.gov/NOPCostSharing.

Basically we know very little at this point. But if you want to know more about how government works or how budgets affect agricultural programs, this post from the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a fantastic reference. I learned a lot from reading it – especially about what we don’t know and why!

We have delayed publishing an update on the fiscal year 2011 appropriations and fiscal year 2012 budget bills several times in the past week due to a lack of detailed information emanating from Capitol Hill.  Now, with the government shutdown averted just after midnight last night, we understand (from the many emails received!) that readers would like to know what happened on sustainable agriculture priorities.  Unfortunately there is not yet much to report with any degree of assurance.

Fiscal Year 2011 Bill

We will likely not be able to provide details on the 2011 appropriations bill until late Monday after the bill is (hopefully) made public.  Appropriations staff on Capitol Hill are busy this weekend working on the details of the package announced last night.

From press accounts, the basics of the deal are a $42 billion cut below FY 2010 levels for non-defense spending coupled with a $4 billion increase in defense spending, for a net decrease of approximately $38 billion.  Of that $38 billion, $10 billion was already enacted via the two preceding short term Continuing Resolutions over the past five weeks and $2 billion more was enacted last night in the form of a new one-week Continuing Resolution.

No USDA programs were included in the new $2 billion in cuts; those cuts were focused on Transportation and Housing and Urban Development.

Agriculture and rural development were already subject to disproportionately high cutbacks in the earlier two short-term Continuing Resolutions.

The new Continuing Resolution passed last night expires next Friday, April 15, at the same time that many people will be racing to the Post Office with their last minute tax return filings.  The rest-of-FY 2011 appropriations bill is being drafted now.  It will be made public soon, presumably on Monday.  The House will vote on the bill first.  By House rules, the bill will need to sit for three days before it can be voted on, presumably on Thursday.  The Senate will vote later on Thursday or on Friday.

Two issues have been particularly contentious over the last several weeks.  First, there has been significant disagreement over the issue of whether the final measure will include cuts to mandatory spending programs in addition to discretionary spending, which is the normal focus of appropriations bills.  (Cuts to mandatory programs, such as Social Security, food stamps, or farm subsidies, are known in Hill-speak as “CHIMPS” (changes in mandatory program spending)).  Second,  it has been uncertain whether the bill would legislate as well as appropriate via provisions known as legislative “riders.”

According to press accounts, the final bill does include substantial CHIMPS, as favored by Senate Democrats and the White House.  Nearly $18 billion of the $42 billion in non-defense cuts are reported to be from mandatory spending.  Or to put it another way, of the $30 billion remaining to be cut beyond the reductions already made in the short-term Continuing Resolutions, 60 percent will come from mandatory programs. Read more »

USDA Press Release No. 0155.11;C ontact: FNS Office of Communications, 703-305-2281

People’s Gardens Aim to Provide Nutritious, Safe and Healthier Choices for Children and Communities

WASHINGTON, April 7, 2011 — Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced today that Washington State University will develop and run the People’s Garden School Pilot Program which will serve an estimated 2,800 students attending 70 elementary schools in Washington, New York, Iowa and Arkansas. The Healthy Gardens, Healthy Youth pilot is an innovative strategy to help our nation win the future through improved K-12 education. It explores the impact of school gardens on learning and on changing student consumption patterns so they make healthier food choices.”School gardens hold great promise for educating our kids about food production and nutrition,” said Vilsack. “Learning where food comes from and what fresh food tastes like, and the pride of growing and serving your own fruits and vegetables, are life-changing experiences. Engaging kids in our efforts to end childhood hunger and curb childhood obesity is critical if we are going to succeed.” Read more »

The Surprisingly Complex Debate Over Whether Genetically Modified Foods Should Be Labeled (By Gregory B. Hladky, Hartford Advocate, March 29, 2011)
EXCERPT: Letting Connecticut consumers know if the food they’re buying has been genetically modified seems like an innocent enough idea. After all, U.S. government experts say it’s safe, the agri-industrial giants say it’s safe, and so do the food manufacturing conglomerates. So why do you suppose everyone is expecting an all-out legislative Blitzkrieg to be waged against a little proposal in Connecticut’s General Assembly to require labeling of genetically modified foods? “Anytime you step on somebody’s toes, you’re going to stir up a hornet’s nest,” explains state Rep. Richard Roy, the Milford Democrat who attached the labeling proposal to a bill that came out of the legislature’s Environment Committee last week. Read more…

PRESS RELEASE: Effort Gaining Attention Nationwide

BLUE HILL, MAINE – On Saturday, April 2, Blue Hill became the third town in Maine to adopt the Local Food and Self-Governance Ordinance. The Ordinance was passed at Blue Hill’s town meeting by a near unanimous vote. This comes on the heals of the unanimous passage of the Ordinance in the neighboring towns of Sedgwick and Penobscot on March 5 and March 7, respectively. The Ordinance asserts that towns can determine their own food and farming policies locally, and exempts direct food sales from state and federal license and inspection requirements.

The Ordinance failed in a fourth town, Brooksville, on March 7, by a vote of 161 to 152, however voting irregularities have called the vote’s validity into question. Brooksville town residents are
circulating a petition calling for a revote at a special town meeting, which could take place in as little as a few months. The petition questions the legality of placing the town’s Ordinance Review Committee’s recommendation of a “No” vote on the ballot. Brooksville was the only town to vote on the ordinance by ballot, rather than by a show of hands.

Blue Hill resident John Gandy said the passage of the Blue Hill ordinance “is a huge milestone in the struggle to protect the rights, not only of farmers to sell their products, but also of all citizens to eat the food of their choice.” Gandy serves as the Master for the Halcyon Grange in North Blue Hill, which passed a Resolution for Food Sovereignty in February of this year. “It is time citizens start defending our rights against big government and big business.” Read more »

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) today announced interest rates for April 2011. The CCC borrowing rate-based charge for April 2011 is 0.250 percent, unchanged from 0.250 in March 2011. For 1996 and subsequent crop year commodity and marketing assistance loans, the interest rate for loans disbursed during April 2011 is 1.250 percent, unchanged from 1.250 in March 2011. Read more »

Farm Bill Debate Starts with 2011 Funding Bill – While most commentaries on the 2012 Farm Bill treat it, quite logically, as a coming attraction, in many key respects the battle is already joined.  Understanding why that is the case requires some insight into the strange world of congressional budgeting. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 appropriations bill that Congress and the Administration are trying to find common ground on before current funding expires next Friday will almost certainly reach beyond cuts to discretionary spending – the normal and proper purview of appropriations bills — and dip into mandatory funding too, even though mandatory spending is normally within the purview of authorizing committees. Read more…

154 Groups Deliver Letter Opposing “Riders” to Appropriations Bill – More than 150 national organizations, including NSAC, delivered a letter to both Senate and White House leadership on Friday, April 1, opposing the attachment of non-germane legislative amendments, or “riders,” to the fiscal year (FY) 2011 appropriations bill, which Congress is likely to vote on next week. The same letter was sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) as well as to the President and Vice President.   Read more…

House Passes Bill to Limit EPA Authority While Senate Considers EPA Amendments – On Thursday, March 31, the House of Representatives passed the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011 (H.R. 872), a bill that would prohibit the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from requiring entities to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations System (NPDES) permit for the application of pesticides near navigable waters, so long as they are already registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The bill, offered by Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-OH) and 137 cosponsors, was passed 292-130.  It was offered in response to a 2009 court case, National Cotton Council v. EPA, in which the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Clean Water Act (CWA) requirements apply to farmers who are applying pesticides in or near waterways.   Read more…

House Holds Appropriations Hearing on Rural Development – On Thursday morning, March 31, the House Subcommittee on Agriculture Appropriations held a hearing on Rural Development in Fiscal Year 2012.  The hearing started with general remarks from subcommittee members regarding concern about the state of rural America, including a note that USDA Secretary Vilsack previously testified to the Subcommittee that rural America has been in a depression for nearly ten years. In his opening testimony, Undersecretary for Rural Development Dallas Tonsager echoed this concern, explaining that “compared to their urban counterparts, rural Americans are more likely to be over the age of 65, earn lower average incomes, and are more likely to live in poverty.”  Read more…

For Immediate Release:  Contact: 202-554-1600

NFU Concludes 109th Annual Convention

National Farmers Union (NFU) adjourned its 109th annual convention in San Antonio, Texas. More than 500 Farmers Union members from across the country gathered to celebrate the past year’s achievements, look ahead to future challenges, and vote on the farm organization’s priorities for the coming year.

“This was a very exciting convention,” said NFU President Roger Johnson. “We dealt with a wide variety of issues, from the 2012 Farm Bill to conservation to the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) rule to biotechnology and trade. Our members made their voices heard and set the policy that they want us to advocate for in the coming year.”

The convention also featured numerous speakers, including U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development Under Secretary Dallas Tonsager, former Sen. Byron Dorgan and former Texas Ag Commissioner Jim Hightower. Convention attendees also had the opportunity to hear from speaker panels on various topics. Read more »

By Taylor Reid

I believe in the basic tenets of our capitalist economic system with some measure of control – against monopolies or wrongdoing. I believe that when someone works hard enough, or even when they’re simply lucky enough to be the first to stumble on some novel idea, that they should have some rights to control that idea, and generate money from it if they want. That’s what promotes innovation. And there have been many very good innovations over the years, innovations that have improved the quality of our lives.

But I also believe we have gone wrong, dangerously wrong, by allowing the patenting of certain living organisms and their component parts in agriculture, something that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld. The following is a brief history of the issue:

Stein (2005)¹ tracks this development with respect to seeds, beginning with the U.S. Plant Patent Act of 1930, continuing with the 1970 Plant Variety Protection Act, and moving into the judicial system starting with the 1980 Supreme Court decision Diamond v. Chakrabarty², which laid the legal groundwork for the “privatization and commodification” of the genetics of seeds.  In 1985 Ex Parte Hibberd extended property rights to the individual components of and organism, such as genetic information. Asgrow Seed v. Winterboer, in 1995 continued the trend by denying the rights of farmers to save and resell patented seed products.  The next step was J.E.M. AG Supply v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International. Pioneer Hi-Bred, a large seed company, sued a small Iowa seed supply company, Farm Advantage, for violating patents on hybrid corn seed, affirming that newly developed plant breeds are covered by expansive utility patents.  The cumulative effect of this legislation was to concentrate corporate power in the seed industry and encourage massive consolidation.  In the past several decades, the global seed industry has grown significantly and is now worth an estimated 15 billion dollars.

Now a few companies – chemical companies almost exclusively – have gained unprecedented control over the global seed industry through the patent process, and by buying up smaller seed companies. For a great and rather chilling overview of this process, see Phil Howard’s article Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996-2008 published in the Journal Sustainability (2009: volume 1, issue 4, pages 1266-1287).

It certainly seems ironic today, but among the fundamental concepts enshrined in the US Constitution was a provision which might arguably be credited as the most significant factor in undermining the much celebrated ideals of agrarian and egalitarian thinkers such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. The consequences of Article 8.8 may not have been predicted in the late 1700’s, but as Busch³ points out, congressional power to “promote the Progress of Science…by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” would have extraordinary implications on the direction of American society.  It is difficult to blame these idealistic pioneers for failing to recognize the fallacy inherent in a notion of government as an arbiter of economic justice.  As Warren Samuels emphasizes, American rhetorical and cultural ideology continues to perpetuate an unfounded belief in the separation and exclusivity of government and economy⁴. What Samuels calls “the legal-economic nexus”, is the seldom recognized phenomenon by which “…both polity and economy are continuously and simultaneously (re)formed in a manner that negates any conception of their independent self-subsistence.”

The result in agriculture has been the unprecedented control over the basic components needed to produce many of our most important agricultural crops through the process of consolidation and patenting, much of it based on the process of genetic modification. There is also an unhealthy co-mingling of the US government (charged with regulating patents)⁵, public universities (where many of these patents are developed)⁶, and private companies in allocating control over the basis (seeds, plants, and animals) for many of our most important food resources. The argument I’m putting forward here is not about the ethical or even the ecological implications of genetic modification (that’s a whole different story). I simply suggest that the seed industry has become too concentrated, too powerful, and that there need to be limits on the patenting of life and the monopolistic control of the seed industry by biotechnology/chemical companies.

REFERENCES

¹ Stein, Haley. 2005. “Intellectual Property and Genetically Modified Seeds: The United States, Trade, and the Developing World.” Northwestern Jorunal of Technology and Intellectual Property 3:159-178.

² 1980. “DIAMOND, COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS v. CHAKRABARTY. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CUSTOMS AND PATENT APPEALS, 447 U.S. 303.” United States Supreme Court.

³ Busch, Lawrence. 2000. The Eclipse of Morality: Science, State, and Market. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.

⁴ Samuels, Warren. 1989. “The Legal-Economic Nexus.” George Washington Law Review 57:1556-1578.

⁵ Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. 2001. Guide to U.S. Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology Products. Report Available at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Food_and_Biotechnology/hhs_biotech_0901.pdf.

⁶ Press, Eyal, and Jennifer Washburn. 2000. “The Kept University.” The Atlantic Monthly 285:39-54.; Etzkowitz, Henry, Andrew Webster, Christiane Gebhardt, and Branca Regina Cantisano Terra. 2000. “The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm.” Research Policy 29:313-330.; Krimsky, Sheldon, James G. Ennis, and Robert Weissman. 1991. “Academic-Corporate Ties in Biotechnology: A Quantitative Study.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 16:275-287.

By Kari Hamerschlag (Civil Eats)

EXCERPT: Federal nutritional guidelines advise us to eat five-to-nine servings of fruits and vegetables a day. That’s not too difficult if you are lucky enough to have access to the fresh and tasty produce grown in Northern California, where I live. But many folks in this region and in the rest of the country aren’t so lucky. Fresh vegetable consumption has declined by nine pounds per person over the past 10 years. And it’s no wonder, considering how little US agricultural policy invests in fruit and vegetable production.

Read more http://civileats.com/2011/03/14/farm-bill-2012-eaters-deserve-a-place-at-the-table/

The following article was written by Christopher Bedford (see biographical information below). Chris is never one to pull punches, and as with all of our guest posts, his opinions don’t necessarily represent those of beginningfarmers.org or it’s administrators. But whatever side of these controversies you find yourself on, I am sure the issues he tackles in this writing will fire you up. So please send in your comments.

In Florida, State Senator Jim Norman has introduced SB 1246 to make “photographing farming activities from the air or from a roadside” a First Degree Felony, punishable with up to 30 years in prison. This bill has the support of the Florida Farm Bureau and its 140,000 members statewide.

The new Florida state government — all Republican — with Rick Scott as Governor and a 70% majority in the State Senate and a 67.5% majority in the State House of Representatives — took power last Thursday (March 10th). This means if Republicans can agree on a piece of legislation, it will be law unless it can be proven through the courts to be unconstitutional (a lengthy process).

Sen. Norman’s proposed legislation could have put the  film makers of “Food, Inc.” in jail.

This development (perhaps part of a larger American Legislative Exchange Council ALEC initiative) in and of itself does not signal the end of anything.

But proposals like this one and Michigan’s HB 4306 (which mandates privatization of non-classroom school functions including food service) should be seen in the context of the larger push back against the local food revolution that is discussed on this list serv and that will be at the heart of the Farm Bill 2012 debate.

Agribusiness advocates in the US House and Senate will face something of a dilemma in the renewed Farm Bill legislation. Some of the new Tea Party like Representatives are true libertarians with long opposition to government subsidies in agriculture. The Cato Institute has been one of the leading opponents of ethanol subsidies for more than a decade.

Hypothetically, these libertarian Republicans could join with Democrats to defeat continuing subsidies — witness the ad hoc bipartisan coalition that defeated the alternative engine for F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The actual creation of such a coalition is pretty speculative, given the power of industrial agriculture in both parties.

But there is one area of potential agreement that might fundamentally alter the Farm Bill’s dictates.

In the name of balancing the federal budget, states could be required to implement the “efficiencies of private commerce” in school meal programs and to institute protections like the Florida bill of food producers (also in the name of Homeland Security). In other words, the extreme proposals of ALEC could offer a political way out for most sides in the Farm Bill debate.

As we enter the Farm Bill process, we should be looking at ALEC’s proposed legislation AND the passage of bills like Florida’s SB 1246 and Michigan’s HB 4306 as political signals for what is to come.

I personally believe we should pursue a “building healthy soil” strategy in the Farm Bill. I think most consumers understand Robert Rodale’s old dictum, “Healthy soil. Healthy plants. Healthy people.” If we view all Farm Bill programs through this lens, we can’t go wrong.

Christopher Bedford

Filmmaker-Writer-Organizer

Center for Economic Security

chrisbedford@charter.net

www.chrisbedfordfilms.com

www.healthyschoolmeals.org

www.center4economicsecurity.org

-  The New Entry Sustainable Farming Project has developed some very cool new financial tools for farmers: a calculator to help poultry growers compare the cost of different processing options, both as a customizable spreadsheet and as an easy to use online calculator, and a full-blown, soup-to-nuts poultry enterprise calculator. They are available online here, free to use and download, so have at it!

- In a recent New York Times article, “Foodies Can Eclipse (and save) the Green Movement” Bryan Walsh makes clear the need to connect the food movement and the environment. Agricultural reform can help promote healthier foods while finding solutions to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and water pollution.

- Minneapolis is on its way toward adopting a new comprehensive urban agriculture policy plan.  Last Tuesday, February 22, the Minneapolis City Planning Commission moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed plan. The next step is for a subcommittee of the City  Council to discuss the plan on March 24th, and if voted out of committee to be considered by the entire Council. For more see urbanfoodpolicy.com

- GIPSA Briefings in House and Senate: On February 28, 2011, briefings on the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) rule were held in both the Senate and House.  Chandler Goule of the National Farmers Union moderated a panel of producers in favor of the rule: Mike Weaver, a contract poultry producer in West Virginia for Pilgrim’s Pride; Dan Hodges, a Berkshire hog producer from Nebraska; and Judy McCullom, a cow-calf operator from Wyoming. Each of the three described the current state of their segment of industry,  and discussed the potential implications of the rule.  Contract poultry production, especially, would benefit because the industry is more dependent on contract production than the hog or cattle industry research.  Read more…